How can warranty be void if 'warranty void' sticker is broken?

[Bob Sava]

From what I read, quote from the article below, as per Magnusson Moss Warranty Act, "Warranty Void" stickers violate federal laws and may also violate right-to-repair state laws.

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/gv5ddm/warranty-void-if-removed-stickers-are-illegal

If you own a gaming console, laptop, or computer, it's likely you've seen one of these warnings in the form of a sticker placed over a screw or a seam: "Warranty void if removed."

In addition, big manufacturers such as Sony, Microsoft, and Apple explicitly note or imply in their official agreements that their year-long manufacturer warranties—which entitle you to a replacement or repair if your device is defective—are void if consumers attempt to repair their gadgets or take them to a third party repair professional.

What almost no one knows is that these stickers and clauses are illegal under a federal law passed in 1975 called the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

To be clear, federal law says you can open your electronics without voiding the warranty, regardless of what the language of that warranty says.

This counterintuitive fact has far-reaching implications as manufacturers have stepped up their attempts to monopolize the device repair market.

[Rog520]

I'd enjoy seeing a court ruling on this one. Most consumer products are covered under a limited warranty, and the manufacturer may impose reasonable ... limitations... as to the terms and extent of the warranty. Tampering with, altering, or modifying a device (which a broken sticker would serve as and indication of) is one common and perfectly legal (as far as I'm aware) reason to invalidate a warranty. Also, the law covers only consumer devices, not commercial ones. And service stickers (we used to apply these to equipment that we had repaired) are a totally different thing, too.

[edavid]

Magnuson-Moss supersedes the warranty language.  The manufacturer has to show that the consumer's "tampering" caused the defect.  The problem is that usually the consumer's only recourse is small claims court.

[Rog520]

I'm not a lawyer but my reading of the law indicates that manufacturers who provide labor and parts free of charge as part of their warranty (which is most warranties on consumer electronics, for the term of the warranty) are allowed to place limitations on where the consumer may get the device repaired - thus the warranty void sticker. Where certain aspects of labor and/or parts are not covered under warranty then the manufacturer may not place restrictions on where the device is repaired or what brand of parts are used. With most consumer electronics products there is no legitimate reason for the consumer to open the device because the warranty covers any potential problem which would require it to be opened...unlike a car, for example, which may require routine non-warranty maintenance or repair, for example.

[Elasia]

  *cough* *cough* 

[edavid]

I'm not a lawyer but my reading of the law indicates that manufacturers who provide labor and parts free of charge as part of their warranty (which is most warranties on consumer electronics, for the term of the warranty) are allowed to place limitations on where the consumer may get the device repaired - thus the warranty void sticker. Where certain aspects of labor and/or parts are not covered under warranty then the manufacturer may not place restrictions on where the device is repaired or what brand of parts are used. With most consumer electronics products there is no legitimate reason for the consumer to open the device because the warranty covers any potential problem which would require it to be opened...unlike a car, for example, which may require routine non-warranty maintenance or repair, for example.

The limitation only applies to warranty repairs.   Let's say the device fails twice.  The consumer may choose to repair failure #1 herself, and make a warranty claim for failure #2.   The warranty is still valid unless the first repair specifically caused failure #2.

Another common case is the external disk drive that is shucked and used without the enclosure.  If the drive fails, it is still covered under warranty unless the shucking caused the failure.

[Rog520]

The limitation only applies to warranty repairs.   Let's say the device fails twice.  The consumer may choose to repair failure #1 herself, and make a warranty claim for failure #2.   The warranty is still valid unless the first repair specifically caused failure #2.

I don't see that provision mentioned anywhere in the law. The consumer can definitely make a choice. If they decide to attempt a repair on an otherwise in-warranty product that has free parts/labor coverage, then they forfeit the warranty. I know a lot of hackers are trying to find a way that entitles them to keep their warranty while tinkering with the insides of their goodies, but legally I think they would lose. Again, I would like to see a court case on this...but a search turns up nothing. Certainly it would be enormously class-actionable if it was a legitimate concern.

Another common case is the external disk drive that is shucked and used without the enclosure.  If the drive fails, it is still covered under warranty unless the shucking caused the failure.

Yes, so long as the drive itself is not opened.

[edavid]

The limitation only applies to warranty repairs.   Let's say the device fails twice.  The consumer may choose to repair failure #1 herself, and make a warranty claim for failure #2.   The warranty is still valid unless the first repair specifically caused failure #2.

I don't see that provision mentioned anywhere in the law. The consumer can definitely make a choice. If they decide to attempt a repair on an otherwise in-warranty product that has free parts/labor coverage, then they forfeit the warranty. I know a lot of hackers are trying to find a way that entitles them to keep their warranty while tinkering with the insides of their goodies, but legally I think they would lose. Again, I would like to see a court case on this...but a search turns up nothing. Certainly it would be enormously class-actionable if it was a legitimate concern.

Consider the case where your in-warranty car won't start, and you're nowhere near a dealer, so you take care of the (minor) repair yourself.  Do you really think it would be legal for the car manufacturer to void the rest of the car's warranty?

[Rog520]

Consider the case where your in-warranty car won't start, and you're nowhere near a dealer, so you take care of the (minor) repair yourself.  Do you really think it would be legal for the car manufacturer to void the rest of the car's warranty?

I think we're straying a little here. A car's warranty typically is not voided when someone else (besides an authorized dealer or repair center) does repair work. That's because the manufacturer has consented to allow it. After all, no one would buy their car if they enforced dealer-only repairs. Could they enforce it? Probably. It's not illegal, provided (again) that the repair is provided free of charge to the consumer. But many manufacturers of electronics devices have decided to enforce it. Again, not illegal so long as repairs are provided free of charge to the consumer. I suppose if enough consumers decided to boycott a product because of it, then that may change. But I don't see that happening. That's my take on it anyway. Here's the relevant snippet (as it applies to cars) from the FTC's website:

"In fact, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which is enforced by the FTC, makes it illegal for manufacturers or dealers to claim that your warranty is void or to deny coverage under your warranty simply because someone other than the dealer did the work. The manufacturer or dealer can, however, require consumers to use select repair facilities if the repair services are provided to consumers free of charge under the warranty."

Note that repairs which are not covered under warranty may be serviced by anyone without voiding the warranty .... unless such repairs lead to damage.

[Bob Sava]

Destroyed the "warranty void' sticker is not an indication of service or alternation work being performed.

[Elasia]

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2015/06/latest-word-warranties

If you have the training/knowledge to do your own repairs and demand parts while it is in warranty then the stickers don't mean shit.  I've gotten parts from mfgs before.. some are cool about it some are assnine.  Take like siglent for example.. pretty well known issue with a particular psu they sell, the banana/jack posts are too deep / loose in some of them.. their answer? ship the user new posts to install themselves and thats documented right on this forum.. guess what those units also got? a sticker

If however you do not have training and you cause damage then you voided it.  It really is just like a car but people are easier to relate to cars and fixing a car is a lot more general knowledge vs electronics repair which is more specialized knowledge.

Now.. here is the rub, if the company doesnt like what you have done and refuses you regardless, what is your recourse? small claims?  How many people would do that?  It comes down to risk vs reward and it is highly stacked in their favor with electronics and a mass fog of what user rights are..  now a repair shop on the other hand might fight this because it is in their business interest to do so.

[Rog520]

Destroyed the "warranty void' sticker is not an indication of service or alternation work being performed.

There are many ways you can invalidate your warranty that have nothing to do with unauthorized service. Fact is that the manufacturer doesn't have to allow you access if they provide free warranty service. Now, with that aside, they can set all sorts of criteria for maintaining your warranty. You usually can't deface the serial number. Sometimes selling the item voids the warranty. Removing the warranty void sticker voids the warranty. Ferinstance, here's the Xbox fine print. This is typical of any consumer product, and I guarantee you that lawyers have scrutinized this many times over:

5. Warranty Exclusions
Microsoft is not responsible and this warranty does not apply if Your Xbox One or Accessory is:

(a) damaged by use with products not sold or licensed by Microsoft (including, for example, games and accessories not manufactured or licensed by Microsoft, and “pirated” games, etc.);

(b) used for commercial purposes (including, for example, rental, pay-per-play, etc.);

(c) opened, modified, or tampered with (including, for example, any attempt to defeat any Xbox One or Accessory technical limitation, security, or anti-piracy mechanism, etc.), or its serial number is altered or removed;

(d) damaged by any external cause (including, for example, by being dropped, used with inadequate ventilation, etc., or failure to follow instructions in the instruction manual for the Xbox One or Accessory);

(e) scratched, dented, etc. or shows other cosmetic damage; or

(f) repaired by anyone other than Microsoft.

[Elasia]

Destroyed the "warranty void' sticker is not an indication of service or alternation work being performed.

There are many ways you can invalidate your warranty that have nothing to do with unauthorized service. Fact is that the manufacturer doesn't have to allow you access if they provide free warranty service. Now, with that aside, they can set all sorts of criteria for maintaining your warranty. You usually can't deface the serial number. Sometimes selling the item voids the warranty. Removing the warranty void sticker voids the warranty. Ferinstance, here's the Xbox fine print. This is typical of any consumer product, and I guarantee you that lawyers have scrutinized this many times over:

5. Warranty Exclusions
Microsoft is not responsible and this warranty does not apply if Your Xbox One or Accessory is:

(a) damaged by use with products not sold or licensed by Microsoft (including, for example, games and accessories not manufactured or licensed by Microsoft, and “pirated” games, etc.);

(b) used for commercial purposes (including, for example, rental, pay-per-play, etc.);

(c) opened, modified, or tampered with (including, for example, any attempt to defeat any Xbox One or Accessory technical limitation, security, or anti-piracy mechanism, etc.), or its serial number is altered or removed;

(d) damaged by any external cause (including, for example, by being dropped, used with inadequate ventilation, etc., or failure to follow instructions in the instruction manual for the Xbox One or Accessory);

(e) scratched, dented, etc. or shows other cosmetic damage; or

(f) repaired by anyone other than Microsoft.

And its completely bogus language inside the US.. this is 800 pound gorilla tactics vs a gnat.  All they have to do is scare people away from their rights or confuse them and they win if the vast majority are duped

More food for thought below, a more recent supreme court case that was 7 to 1

https://www.wired.com/2017/06/impression-v-lexmark/

[Rog520]

And its completely bogus language inside the US.. this is 800 pound gorilla tactics vs a gnat.  All they have to do is scare people away from their rights or confuse them and they win if the vast majority are duped

More food for thought below, a more recent supreme court case that was 7 to 1

https://www.wired.com/2017/06/impression-v-lexmark/

OK, that ruling doesn't address warranties or repairs. And here's the thing: it's not a scare tactic, it's a contract. And you have no right to violate a contract that you entered into voluntarily, and then demand that the other party uphold their end of the bargain and compensate you. If you don't like the terms, don't buy the product. It's that simple.

[Elasia]

And its completely bogus language inside the US.. this is 800 pound gorilla tactics vs a gnat.  All they have to do is scare people away from their rights or confuse them and they win if the vast majority are duped

More food for thought below, a more recent supreme court case that was 7 to 1

https://www.wired.com/2017/06/impression-v-lexmark/

OK, that ruling doesn't address warranties or repairs. And here's the thing: it's not a scare tactic, it's a contract. And you have no right to violate a contract that you entered into voluntarily, and then demand that the other party uphold their end of the bargain and compensate you. If you don't like the terms, don't buy the product. It's that simple.

Sure you can, courts are allowed to strike invalid language and do it all the time without nulling the entire contract and in fact pretty much all of them state that if a court nullifies part of the language the rest of the contract remains intact to the extent enforceable by the court.  That particular ruling goes deeper in that you cant be blocked to modify or repair your own goods due to rights of first sale etc.  This gives you the basic prime to do the repair work yourself or go to a 3rd party in the first place and then claim parts or cost of parts reimbursement from the mfg.

What you wont get from the mfg is labor cost incurred or not usually less major defect.  Now the practical implications of this.. either you go to small claims and get a tiny settlement which few people do and even those that do would be moved to arbitration / settle out of court for the most part leaving only a small fraction of people to deal with.  Mean while they are reaping huge profit margins on the scheme.  And with their huge margins they can buy political power and fairly well keep the same bullshit in place for all intents and purposes.

This has more to do with keeping a very lucrative profit scheme than dealing with law itself.. propaganda is greater than the truth.

In the end, if you dont like it.. sue.. but you will pay in time to do it and thats what they bank on and also they got lawyers just to sandbag people that try so whos going to do it when it will bankrupt most folk?

Not saying this is right or wrong.. this is just how things go at least in the states behind the curtain

[Rog520]

Sure you can, courts are allowed to strike invalid language and do it all the time without nulling the entire contract and in fact pretty much all of them state that if a court nullifies part of the language the rest of the contract remains intact to the extent enforceable by the court.  That particular ruling goes deeper in that you cant be blocked to modify or repair your own goods due to rights of first sale etc.  This gives you the basic prime to do the repair work yourself or go to a 3rd party in the first place and then claim parts or cost of parts reimbursement from the mfg.

It's never been illegal (with a few exceptions) to repair or modify things that you buy. But again, that doesn't entitle you to the benefits of a warranty contract if you violate its terms. Warranties are not an extension of patent law.

[electrolust]

Interesting timing on this thread. Just today, the FTC put out a press release announcing 6 companies have been warned about invalid/illegal warranty voiding.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/04/ftc-staff-warns-companies-it-illegal-condition-warranty-coverage

I believe this largely doesn't apply to test equipment since they made clear that these practices are allowed if

warrantors provide the parts or services for free

[edavid]

I believe this largely doesn't apply to test equipment since they made clear that these practices are allowed if

warrantors provide the parts or services for free

That doesn't have anything to do with the warranty sticker issue though.  It's clearly illegal.

[Lightages]

How about when a company puts a warranty void sticker over a part that is required to open to change fuses. This has been the case of tme,eu on multimeters. I am 100% sure that almost anywhere n the civilized world that trying to block a normal operation of a device as a requirement to maintain a warranty would be invalid.

[ian.ameline]

The stickers are clearly illegal in the USA.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/04/ftc-staff-warns-companies-it-illegal-condition-warranty-coverage

[Elasia]

The stickers are clearly illegal in the USA.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/04/ftc-staff-warns-companies-it-illegal-condition-warranty-coverage

just loops back to my original argument above.. but this may open the door to more class action type activity that may get legs

[edavid]

I see nothing unethical for not to provide warranty to disassembled goods. Who knows if the user intentionally destroyed something in order to get a new replacement?

A manufacturer who cares about quality will be doing failure analysis on the returns.

I know some pathetic losers will intentionally zap out of production and almost out of warranty laptops and claim warranty, in order to get a new, upgraded (equivalent) version with 90 days more warranty.

The vast majority of customers are honest, so why should they suffer because there are a few losers out there?

[edavid]

Most CONSUMERS are honest, but there are professional lurkers and traders that do this shit for a living.
I didn't find a vivid second hand market in US, but second hand electronics are extremely popular in China.
Imagine how those non authorized sellers can provide mint condition goods with free warranty.
I grew up in a Chinese computer store, and for those computer parts traders, destroy and request warranty is standard protocol.

Well, we are talking about US warranty laws (Magnuson-Moss).  What are the warranty laws in China?

[bugi]

The vast majority of customers are honest, so why should they suffer because there are a few losers out there?

I'm going to spin this one around: "... why should manufacturers suffer because there are (quite) a few losers out there?"

After all, stickers or no stickers, those honest customers would not suffer anyway, if they accept the normal warranty repair (and not trying to do things by themselves). (Assuming the manufacturer is also playing nice and honest, too.)

If someone is going to reply on the track of "manufacturers have the money", the obvious continuation is, no, they don't. Some manufacturers do have nice amount of money in the bank, but all the money they have comes from those other customers, so in the end, all customers would suffer from those losers anyway.

(Also, do you happen to have some solid facts about that claim "vast majority of customers being honest", especially on the "vast"ness of the share?  Consider that in most western cultures that would be difficult to measure since laws and regulations tend to keep the dishonest ones not doing the bad things... most of the time.)

[Bob Sava]

Disregarding for a moment that apparently, with some effort, sticker can be defeated.

What do 'bad' people do to make manufacturers 'suffer'?